Muslims Protest ‘Speech That Hurts’ – Yes, In the Same City Where Muslims Were Filmed Violently Assaulting Christians
The question here is which hurts more – words, or violent actions? The old sticks and stones argument…
Arab-American News publisher Osama Siblani rallied Muslim activists in Dearborn, Michigan yesterday, in an attempt to drum up support for ‘blasphemy laws’ that would fundamentally destroy the right of free speech in our country. The group claims that the laws are necessary so as not to hurt the “religious feelings of Muslims”.
Not coincidentally, the group is clearly taking the lead of the Obama administration by calling for these laws in response to an anti-Muslim video – a video that only the administration has focused on, and a video we now know had absolutely nothing to do with the violence currently sweeping the Middle East.
In fact, it is so apparent that this group is channeling the Obama administration, that they are quoting the now famous apology issued by the U.S. Embassy in Egypt, in which they too denounced ‘hurt(ing) the religious beliefs of others’.
Via the Michigan View:
Led by a newspaper publisher, Muslim activists will call for putting limits on American free speech at a Dearborn rally this evening. You can’t make this stuff up.
Nearly a decade after Dearborn’s streets celebrated America for bringing down Saddam Hussein and opening a door to democracy in the Mideast, the same city will be the epicenter today of calls to squelch free speech. Protesting the film, “Innocence of Muslims,” that has sparked protests in the Mideast, rally organizer Tarek Baydoun says that so-called blasphemy laws are necessary to prevent speech that hurts the “the religious feelings of Muslims.”
This assault on the First Amendment in the name of the prophet Mohammed is a sad day in America – and confirms fears that Muslim-American activists do not understand the fundamental separation of church and state in the American Constitution.
“There is a need for deterrent legal measures against those individuals or groups that want to damage relations between people, spread hate and incite violence,” said Arab-American News publisher Osama Siblani, a self-proclaimed “moderate” who is apparently oblivious to how gutting the First Amendment would affect his own business.
It is always astounding how people who protest alleged hate speech can’t ever seem to grasp the fact that the violence is always a more abhorrent action than the speech itself. They do not condemn protesters who burn our embassies. They do not rally against those who murder our diplomats. They simply and repeatedly condemn free speech.
It is particularly ironic in this case, since a group of Muslims, also from Dearborn, Michigan, were filmed violently throwing bottles, stones, and anything else they could find at Christians this past summer.
Jihad Watch reports:
During the 2012 Arab International Festival held this past June in Dearborn, Michigan, a group of Christian evangelists were pelted with stones, bottles, and debris by Muslim youths while deputies from the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office stood idly by, allowing the criminal assault to take place. Many of the Christians were bloodied by the attack. When Ruben Israel, the leader of the Christian group, asked the law enforcement officers present to step in and enforce the criminal law so that the Christians could exercise their right to freedom of speech, Israel was given the option of either leaving the festival or facing arrest….
Here is the video:
Libyan President: U.S. Assertions that Attacks Were Spontaneous Reaction to a Film Are ‘Unfounded and Preposterous’
Honestly, is there anyone in America who believes the attacks in Libya, Cairo, and throughout the Arab world have anything to do with this anti-Mohammad film?
Yet the Obama administration is still trying to pass it off as fact.
First Press Secretary Jay Carney, despite all of the evidence to the contrary, lies about it, and then Ambassador to the U.N., Susan Rice, swears to it.
From Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace:
WALLACE: This week, there have been anti-American protests in two dozen countries across the Islamic world. The white house says it has nothing to do with the president’s policies. Let’s watch.”
JAY CARNEY: This is not a case of protests directed at the United States writ large or at U.S. policy. This is in response to a video that is offensive.”
WALLACE: “You don’t really believe that?”
AMBASSADOR RICE: “Chris, absolutely I believe that, because in fact, it is the case. We have had the evolution of the Arab Spring over the last many months but what sparked the recent violence was the airing on the internet of a very hateful very offensive, very hateful video that has offended many people around the world. Now, our strong view is that there is no excuse for violence. It is reprehensible and never justified but in fact there have been those in various parts of the world who have reacted with violence. Their governments have increasingly and effectively responded and protected our facilities and condemned the violence and this outrageous response to what is an offensive video. There is no question what we have seen in the past with satanic verses and the cartoon of the prophet Muhammad there have been such things that have sparked outrage and anger and this has been the proximate cause of what we’ve seen.”
I’d like to share this image (via Mike Adams) which indicates why this is a preposterous assertion.
President Barack Obama jets off to campaign events Monday in the critical swing state of Ohio, even as Libyan officials and locals have shredded his defensive claim that a spontaneous protest against a Californian’s anti-Islam video caused the Sept. 11 killing of four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador.
“The idea that this criminal and cowardly act was a spontaneous protest that just spun out of control is completely unfounded and preposterous,” Libyan President Mohammed el-Megarif told the liberal National Public Radio network.
Instead, the killing was a military-style attack, he said.
The attacks were pre-meditated, designed to be carried out on the anniversary of 9/11. You simply can’t scale embassy walls or American territory without somebody on the inside letting you in. That part of the plan seems to be supported by one of the diplomats who was killed having stated that the so-called ‘Libyan police’ were caught taking suspicious pictures the night before.
The American people have the evidence in front of them, and the Obama administration is trying to tell them ‘no, no, what you’re seeing isn’t actually real’.
Mark Steyn is right – “Every American should be ashamed of their President”.
This absolutely can not be true. If even a sliver of it is however, multiple people need to be fired effective immediately.
Via the Washington Free Beacon:
U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo.
Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit US Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blog spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any US military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”
If true, the reports indicate that Patterson shirked her obligation to protect U.S. interests, Nightwatch states.
“She did not defend US sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office,” the report states. “She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”
That is beyond abhorrent if true.
While the media continues to focus on Mitt Romney’s statements regarding the disgraceful respon to the attacks by the Obama administration, keep this in mind – the President may be putting the security and safety of U.S. citizens in the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Egyptian security teams over the United States Marines.
Flashback: Obama Wins Nobel Peace Price for "Extraordinary Efforts to Strengthen International Diplomacy and Cooperation Between Peoples"
How’s that ‘strengthened international diplomacy’ working for U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, whose body is being dragged through Libyan streets as we speak?
Here is the full press release from the Nobel announcement in 2009, which in retrospect looks even more preposterous than it did when he originally won.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”
Oslo, October 9, 2009
Obama – The man awarded a Nobel Peace Prize based not on tangible accomplishment, but simply upon expectations.
Now that he has failed to meet those expectations, does the prize need to be returned?
The same Egyptian protesters that President Obama was more than willing to support during the so-called Arab Spring, mounted an unprecedented attack on an American Embassy in Cairo yesterday.
Angry protesters climbed the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on Tuesday and hauled down its American flags, replacing them with black flags with Islamic emblems.
The incident prompted U.S. security guards to fire off a volley of warning shots as a large crowd gathered outside, apparently upset about the production of a Dutch film thought to insult the Prophet Mohammed, said CNN producer Mohammed Fahmy, who was on the scene.
An embassy operator told CNN that the facility had been cleared of diplomatic personnel earlier Tuesday, ahead of the apparent threat, while Egyptian riot police were called to help secure the embassy walls.
An embassy in Libya was also attacked.
Protesters angry over an amateurish American-made video denouncing Islam attacked the United States Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on Tuesday, killing a State Department officer, while Egyptian demonstrators stormed over the fortified walls of the United States Embassy here.
On the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, the assaults were a violent reminder that the changes sweeping the region have hardly dispelled the rage against the United States that still smolders in pockets around the Arab world.
The results? Multiple Americans were shot, while others were the victims of a rocket attack that killed the U.S. Ambassador to Libya.
The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other embassy staff were killed in a rocket attack on their car, a Libyan official said, as they were rushed from a consular building stormed by militants denouncing a U.S.-made film insulting the Prophet Mohammad.
Gunmen had attacked and burned the U.S. consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi, a center of last year’s uprising against Muammar Gaddafi, late on Tuesday evening, killing one U.S. consular official. The building was evacuated.
The Libyan official said the ambassador, Christopher Stevens, was being driven from the consulate building to a safer location when gunmen opened fire.
Believe it or not, the response coming from the U.S. Embassy in Cairo included an apology to the extremists who had carried out the attack.
I’m going to say that again.
The Obama administration apologized to terrorists who had burned down sovereign American buildings and killed an American citizen.
The statement from the Embassy in Cairo actually apologized for “religious incitement” and for “hurting the religious feelings of Muslims”.
I wish I was making that up. Here is the statement:
Have you ever in your life thought, after two U.S. embassies were attacked and seized by radical Islamists, in which multiple Americans were shot – one fatally – and an embassy was nearly burned to the ground, exactly 11 years to the day after the worst terrorist attack in American history perpetrated by similar radical Islamists, that you would ever see an administration actually issue an apology for ‘hurting the religious feelings of Muslims’?
Oh I know they’re trying to walk it back now, but weakness has already been shown. This will go down as the single most cowardly and disgraceful response to an attack on the fundamental American right of free speech in modern history.
Worse, it crossed the bounds of a mere protest when an American was shot and killed. It is a terrorist attack. And we apologized.
President ‘Gutsy Call’ is now officially operating under a foreign policy platform in which we as a nation are subservient to terrorism and slaves to appeasement.
Indeed, the administration is working fervently to backpedal on the apology, 17 hours after the fact. But the damage is done.
The Obama administration is disavowing a statement from its own Cairo embassy that seemed to apologize for anti-Muslim activity in the United States.
“The statement by Embassy Cairo was not cleared by Washington and does not reflect the views of the United States government,” an administration official told POLITICO.
The embassy came under widespread criticism for failing to defend free speech in the face of threats of violence. Egyptian protesters rioted anyway, breaching the embassy walls and tearing down the American flag.
The criticism has been warranted. This may go down as one of the most embarrassing days in foreign policy history, and proves that having ‘we killed Osama bin laden’ as your biggest foreign policy platform isn’t enough. Amateur hour in the White House needs to end in November.